The computations were performed by beings of an advanced civilization. They didn't have to physically land on Manhattan and star or sun - gaze. The archeoastronomer computes the astronomic, optical, etc. characteristics of a problem - idea. In New York the horizon is pretty much flat, but this is not the case in most of the places in Greece. Mountains all over the place. The actual horizon is not the best option in this case.

So my proposition is that the ideal horizon was taken into account. The actual horizon might also have been taken into account. For example in the Manhattan case - to the West , in New Jersey there is a hill, which taking into account its altitude in regards to the central 42 st. Manhattan altitude, it's distance, and the curvature of the Earth yields a viewing angle of 0.26 degrees or so(this is the actual geometric angle, optical distortions not taken into account). On July 21 356 BC, the Sun sets in the west as seen from 6th av. 42nd street Manhattan at an altitude of 0.26 degrees having an azimuth of very close to 299 degrees (298.96 or so). Therefore the alignment is perfectly valid. But based on my book "Thebe - Andromedia Estia", the azimuth of the ideal horizon is what is of more interest - practically identical value found elsewhere.

A lot more behind the Manhattanhenge alignment than meets the eye. Complex cross-referencing correlations, not made by the Dutch or the native Indians.

IHSOYS = EIMI H ZOH = 888

[the-phaistos-disk.webnode.com]



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 03/08/2015 10:11AM by Spiros.